or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by DESuserIGN

So true! Its funny how people are so blind to the subtleties of Apple. Essentially these are the same people who saw no difference between the Mac OS and Windows when it was first introduced. Just not the same thing. In the case of this update it may be a bit *more* subtle, but again, iPhone OS 4.0 and Android are clearly not the same. Not for users, not for developers, not for the user experience.
They didn't spell it out. I guess it works the same way as on Android (since "its been standard on Android for a long time.")
I'm psyched about theJust what photographers have been clamoring for. Woohoo! (not)
It also appears to increase the relevance of ads, increasing their value for advertisers, users, and developers (more revenue, fewer ads.)
Catch-up with who? Have you been drinking?
While you make an excellent argument, don't confuse your opinion with fact. While the $99/year may be reasonable in many ways, I don't think we could call it some kind of *incentive* for shareware developers. There has been no similar annual cost to developing for the Mac (and, of course, no approval process, hosting, etc. either) unless you opted for extra services. I'd just like to see them be a little more friendly to freeware developers and entry level folks rather...
It seems like a silly disincentivization to charge people $100/year to make their software available for free. It will also encourage AdWare. I hope they change this. Thoughts?
Cool! Thanks. And here's the address to view the iPad Guide:http://help.apple.com/ipad/mobile/interface/
Don't you have to pay the $99 a year to be able to release applications as well? I have not been clear on this, but it seems to discourage casual development or developing free apps.
Maybe ADLib stand for "Application Development" Library? As in rich web applications, that is.
New Posts  All Forums: